Hi Jan,
> Hello, I tested the word vocabulary with vocabulary test-vocabulary
I've reproduced your test and it works for me. I could not
reproduce your results.
The formatting is somewhat ugly, sorry for that
>> vocabulary dummy
> ok
>> only
> ok
>> order
> 20
> 1 20 ok
>> forth
> o
function
properly. This is a concious decision towards keeping the amforth
system on the controller as small as possible. However, the programmer
has full control to include whatever is missing for his/her particular
piece of code.
Hope this helps,
Erich
> Sommeting wrong with the definition of
fo...@nassur.net
> To: amforth-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [Amforth] Vocabulary
>
> Hi Jan,
>
> On 05/31/2012 12:14 PM, Jan Kromhout wrote:
> >
> > Hello, I tested the word vocabulary with vocabulary test-vocabulary
> > only forth also test-vocab
Hi Jan,
On 05/31/2012 12:14 PM, Jan Kromhout wrote:
>
> Hello, I tested the word vocabulary with vocabulary test-vocabulary
> only forth also test-vocabulary definitions: test1 ." test1" ;
> : test2 ." test2" ;
> : test3 ." test3" ;
> : test4 ." test4" ;
> : test5 ." test5" ;previous definitions O
